Unemployment -- The Price of Progress?

View/Open

Date

Author

Metadata

Abstract

Two harsh lessons came out of the 1930's; the consumer was
to be penalized, through the employer, for unemployment
created in the process of producing what he would buy.
Secondly, the private market could not be relied upon to
generate "charges against incomes in a way that would
prevent the rise of unemployment to critical levels. The first was a consequence of the establishment
of the unemployment insurance system and experience
rating. The second resulted in the passage of the Employment
Act of 1946. How much this legislation
helped the "Okie" is questionable, and is not pertinent
in this examination of unemployment. The crisis which hit
Oklahoma and the rest of the United States in the 1930's
is important because it demonstrated that unemployment
not only changed a family's diet, but also changed the
family's position in the society in which it existed.
Unemployment not only has economic implications, but as
urbanologists testify, has sociological and political
implications which have revealed themselves recently to
be chaotic. The summer of 1967 has generated
a sense of urgency about correcting the disproportionate
unemployment among Negroes. This, to a great extent,
is structural disproportionment. In the United States
the present administration is supporting two wars, one
in Viet Nam; the other against unemployment. Before
examining the causes and predictions of present unemployment,
it is essential to describe unemployment, and the many
ways it reveals itself. Then, after analyzing recent
trends in levels of unemployment, aggregate demand, and
output per worker, some insight can be gained into the
question, is unemployment the price of progress?